DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (Species B), claims 1, 2 and 5-12, in the reply filed on July 22, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 3-4, 13-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention II, III and Species A there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 11, 2026.
Claim Interpretation
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
4. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a. A light concentrating unit which concentrates the prepulse laser light and the main pulse laser light on the target
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for a “light concentrating unit”, is taken to include a laser light concentrating mirror (according to [0036] of the instant specification).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
6. Claims 1-2, 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
7. Regarding claim 1:
Claim 1 recites “the plurality of EUV energy sensors”, which lacks antecedent basis. Claim 1 recites “a plurality of EUV light sensors”, but a plurality of EUV energy sensors is never introduced.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a chamber into which a buffer gas is supplied”, which is vague and indefinite because the claim does not provide a discernable boundary on what performs the function. The recited function does not follow from the structure recited in the claim, i.e. a chamber, so it is unclear whether the function requires some other structure or is simply a result of operating the chamber in a certain manner. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to draw a clear boundary between what is and is not covered by the claim. See MPEP 2173.05(g) for more information.
In addition, claim 1 recites “the vibration threshold which reflects a vibration occurrence irradiation position being the irradiation position”. Claim 1 introduces “the irradiation position” of the laser light earlier. It is unclear if the applicant is defining a different irradiation position or not.
8. Regarding claim 9:
Claim 9 recites “calculates a gradient based on the values of the first index at the three positions”. It is unclear from the claim language what the gradient is calculated with respect to, whether it is a linear-fit slope ([0063] of the instant application teaches an example of a linear approximation) or any other measure of change. For examination purposes, “gradient” is broadly interpreted as not being limited to a linear gradient, but including changes in magnitude in general, such as a polynomial fit.
Regarding claim 10:
Claim 10 recites “improving the value of the first index”. Claim 1 recites the first index in general, and it is unclear what mathematical or physical condition constitutes an improvement, or in which direction the irradiation position is moved. For examination purposes, the irradiation position is moved in any direction given a gradient based on the first index.
Regarding claim 11:
Claim 11 recites “in a direction for cause the value of the second index not to exceed the vibration threshold when at least one of the acquired values of the second index has exceeded the vibration threshold.” It is unclear whether a single value or all values of the second index must stay under the vibration limit.
In addition, claim 11 recites “not to exceed the vibration threshold”. [0135] of the instant application establishes a lower and upper threshold. It is unclear whether “exceed” encompasses both sides of the threshold. For examination purposes, “exceed” is interpreted to be either going above the upper limit or dropping below the lower limit.
Claims 2, 5-12 depend on claim 1 and are also rejected as indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
9. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
10. Claim 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura (US 20180343729) in view of Kouge (US 20210029811), further in view of Chen (US 20220260927).
11. Regarding claim 1:
Nishimura teaches an EUV light generation system ([0007] teaches an extreme ultraviolet light generating apparatus), comprising:
a chamber ([0087] teaches chamber 2); a laser device configured to output laser light to be radiated to a target supplied into the chamber ([0090] teaches laser apparatus that introduces the pulsed laser light 31 into the chamber 2); an actuator configured to change an irradiation position of the laser light on the target ([0208] teaches the application position adjustment unit 7 is a mechanism that adjusts the application position of the pulsed laser light 31. [0100] teaches the manipulator 224 that adjusts at least one of the position and attitude of the laser light focusing mirror 221);
a plurality of EUV light sensors configured to detect EUV energy which is energy of EUV light radiated from the target irradiated with the laser light ([0136] teaches EUV light sensors 43 that measure the energy of the EUV light 277); and a processor configured to control the actuator ([0143] teaches controller 8 that controls manipulator 224. [0145] teaches that the controller includes a computer with hardware such as a processor), the processor executing:
a first control of acquiring a value of a first index related to output values of the plurality of EUV energy sensors ([0234] teaches the controller 8 performs the statistical processing of the measured values transmitted from the EUV light sensors 43a to 43c, and acquires the energy of the EUV light 277. The energy of the EUV light 277 may be the average value of the measured values transmitted from the EUV light sensors 43a to 43c. [0236] teaches that the controller 8 may acquire the variation in the energy of the EUV light 277, as the measurement result of the EUV light sensor 43. The variation in the energy of the EUV light may be 3σ. [0387] teaches that such variation in the energy is regarded as an index), acquiring a value of a second index related to a ratio of the output values of the plurality of EUV energy sensors ([0175] teaches acquiring a second index based on the ratio of sensor outputs to evaluate the centroid, as shown by the mathematical expressions), and
controlling the actuator based on the value of the first index ([0402] teaches that the controller 8 determines the targeted centroid, based on not only the inflection points but also the distributions of the value of the EUV energy 3σ. [0245] teaches that the controller 8 sets the targeted application position of the application position of the pulsed laser light 31, such that the centroid of the EUV light 277 becomes the new targeted centroid. Then, the controller controls the application position adjusting unit 7 according to the set targeted application position).
Nishimura does not specify that buffer gas is introduced into the chamber.
However, Kouge teaches introducing hydrogen gas into the chamber ([0094]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nishimura to include that hydrogen gas is introduced into the chamber, as taught by Kouge. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do this to prevent adhesion of debris to a reflective surface of a mirror that decreases the reflectance of the reflective surface (Kouge [0094]).
Nishimura does not specifically note a second control of, during the first control, controlling the actuator to move the irradiation position of the laser light in a direction for causing the value of the second index not to exceed a threshold when the value of the second index has exceeded the threshold which reflects an occurrence irradiation position being the irradiation position.
However, Chen teaches changes in chamber environment causes parameters to change over time along with drift ([0037]) and the acceptable range is a standard deviation less than or greater than an energy ratio in the original model ([0075]). Chen further teaches adjusting a configurable parameter of the laser module when an energy ratio falls outside an acceptable range ([0089] teaches determining whether the first energy ratio is within a first acceptable range. In response to the first energy ratio is out of the first acceptable range, adjusting a configurable parameter of the excitation laser module to set the first energy ratio within the first acceptable range). The adjustment occurs to keep variations in check (Chen [0075] teaches that the controller 90 continuously adjusts the configurable parameters of the excitation laser module 300 and will not stop the adjustment until the controller 90 detects the variation of energy measurement of the EUV light is in the acceptable range). Chen further teaches that part of the adjustment is done through adjusting actuator 332 to control a movement of the steerable mirror, thereby changing the amount of the excitation laser reflected and/or scattered by the target droplet into the energy sensor module ([0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nishimura in view of Kouge to incorporate monitoring the energy ratio of the EUV sensors and trigger the adjustment mechanism when the ratio exceeds an acceptable range/threshold, as taught by Chen. One of ordinary skills in the art would be motivated to make such modification to maintain a consistent and stable light energy (Chen [0075]) and prevent misaligned pulse that causes reduction in the amount of plasma (Chen [0041]).
Chen does not specify the vibration threshold. Therefore, the combined device fails to disclose the acceptable range to be a vibration threshold.
However, Chen teaches that the parameters may change due to drift or changes to chamber environment ([0037]) and Kouge teaches the supply of a hydrogen gas (as evidenced by the instant specification [0007], [0075], [0109] which teaches that the introduction of the buffer gas causes vibration. Such vibration is an inherent property that follows the introduction of buffer gas), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the acceptable range (i.e. threshold) of Chen to be inclusive of any vibrational threshold caused by gas introduction (as suggested by Kouge) because such a parameter change would result in a change to the chamber environment of Chen ([0037]), wherein accounting for parameter changes in the acceptable range would prevent misalignment due to such a vibration. Here, the threshold of vibration is interpreted as the acceptable range as any changes to environment (i.e. hydrogen gas supply) being outside the range (1-3 standard deviations) would be unacceptable as disclosed in Chen. One of ordinary skills in the art would be motivated to make such modification to maintain a consistent and stable light energy (Chen [0075]) and prevent misaligned pulse that causes reduction in the amount of plasma (Chen [0041]).
12. Regarding claim 2:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 1.
Nishimura in view of Kouge does not specifically teach that wherein the processor previously acquires and holds the vibration threshold.
Chen teaches acquiring an acceptable range in advance and holding it as a baseline model for subsequent operations ([0076] teaches adjustment information of the parameters is determined and is set as model (i.e. acceptable range)). Chen further teaches that the controller includes memory to hold information during execution of instructions ([0081]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nishimura in view of Kouge, to acquire and hold the acceptable range prior to processing, as taught by Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make such modification to quickly and accurately compare energy variations during continuous operation (Chen [0075]-[0076]). Note: the vibration threshold would have been obvious as discussed above in claim 1.
13. Regarding claim 5:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 1. Nishimura further teaches that wherein the first index is an index indicating temporal deviation of the EUV energy ([0388] and [0191] teach that the energy stability of the EUV light 277 is the variation in the energy of the EUV light 277 and is described as 3σ. The deviation is consistent with the description in [0051]-[0053] of the instant application).
14. Regarding claim 6:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 5. Nishimura further teaches that wherein the laser light includes prepulse laser light to be radiated to the target and main pulse laser light to be radiated ([0295] teaches that the laser apparatus 3 outputs three pulsed laser light beams of a first pre-pulsed laser light 31b, a second pre-pulsed laser light 31c, and a main pulsed laser light 31a) to the target which has been diffused by irradiation with the prepulse laser light ([0335] teaches that the target 27 to which the first pre-pulsed laser light 31b has been applied becomes a state where fine particles such as micro droplets and clusters diffuse in the form of a mist. [0339] teaches that the main pulsed laser light 31a output from the main pulsed laser apparatus 3a is applied to the target 27 that has appropriately diffused), and the processor controls the actuator to control an irradiation position of the prepulse laser light and an irradiation position of the main pulse laser light on the target ([0344] teaches that the controller 8 controls the application position adjusting unit 7, such that the application position of the first pre-pulsed laser light 31b, the second pre-pulsed laser light 31c, and the main pulsed laser light 31a is scanned in accordance with the set reference scan point group).
15. Regarding claim 7:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 6. Nishimura further teaches that wherein the actuator is a stage ([0102] teaches that the manipulator 224 may be a stage as the mechanism that adjusts at least one of the position and attitude of the laser light focusing mirror 221) configured to move a light concentrating unit (the light concentrating unit is interpreted under 35 U.S.C 112(f) to include a laser light concentrating mirror. [0106] teaches the EUV light focusing mirror laser light focusing mirror 221) which concentrates the prepulse laser light and the main pulse laser light on the target ([0097] teaches that the laser light focusing mirror 221 focuses the reflected pulsed laser light 31 on the plasma generation region).
16. Regarding claim 8:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 1. Nishimura further teaches that wherein the second index is a centroid position of the EUV energy ([0175] teaches that the controller 8 defines the calculated value of Expressions 1 and 2 as index for evaluating centroid coordinate).
17. Regarding claim 9:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 1. Nishimura further teaches that wherein the processor acquires values of the first index at three positions (Under BRI, the claim does not say only three. [0223] teaches the controller 8 makes the application position adjusting unit 7 scan the application position of the pulsed laser light 31 in accordance with a reference scan point group including a plurality of reference scan points that are mutually different in position. [0236] teaches that the controller 8 may acquire the variation in the energy, corresponding to the first index, of the EUV light 277, as the measurement result) with a current irradiation position as a center ([0224] teaches that the reference scan point group is created using a table in which positions are arrayed in a matrix with respect to the current application position. Scanning an arrayed matrix with respect to the current position encompasses acquiring values at a localized subset of positions, such as three positions at the center, a negative step, and a positive step),
Nishimura in view of Kouge does not specify calculating a gradient based on the values of the first index at the three positions, and executes the first control based on the gradient.
Chen teaches evaluating the slope of the index to execute control ([0071] teaches a linear relationship between separation Sep_y and OMY can be interpreted. An adjustment in OMY can be obtained by putting the separation Sep_y measured in operation S54 into the linear equation shown in fig. 10. Here, OMY corresponds to the radiation position). By using the calculated linear relationship, a control is executed ([0071] teaches that by adjusting the OMY from 8 to 4, the energy ratio BiY21 returns to a value approaching the original model).
Nishimura teaches the need for minimizing the EUV energy 3σ ([0396]) and that EUV energy 3σ is dependent upon positions of scan points ([0390]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nishimura in view of Kouge to include calculating linear relationship between control parameter and an index and then adjust the control parameter based on the linear relationship, as taught by Chen. Although Chen does not specify the same first index as Nishimura, Chen is used for its general teaching of controlling and adjusting parameter based on a linear relationship to correct an index. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the mathematical technique to perform control and adjust an index based on a gradient, thereby optimizing radiation positioning in an EUV system (Chen [0071]).
18. Regarding claim 10:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 9.
Nishimura in view of Kouge does not specifically teach that wherein the processor moves the irradiation position based on the gradient in the first control in a direction for improving the value of the first index.
Chen teaches evaluating the slope of the index to execute control ([0071] teaches a linear relationship between separation Sep_y and OMY can be interpreted. An adjustment in OMY can be obtained by putting the separation Sep_y measured in operation S54 into the linear equation shown in fig. 10. Here, OMY corresponds to the radiation position as taught by [0071]). By using the calculated linear relationship, a control is executed specifically by adjusting the radiation position in a certain direction ([0071] teaches that by adjusting the OMY from 8 to 4, the energy ratio BiY21 returns to a value approaching the original model).
Nishimura teaches the need for minimizing the EUV energy 3σ ([0396]) and that EUV energy 3σ is dependent upon positions of scan points ([0390]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nishimura in view of Kouge to include calculating linear relationship between control parameter and an index and then adjust the control parameter in a desired direction based on the linear relationship, as taught by Chen. Although Chen does not specify the same first index as Nishimura, Chen is used for its general teaching of controlling and adjusting the radiation position in a desired direction based on a linear relationship to correct an index. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the mathematical technique to perform control and adjust an index based on a gradient, thereby optimizing radiation positioning in an EUV system (Chen [0071]).
19. Regarding claim 11:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 9. Nishimura further teaches that wherein, in the second control, the processor acquires values of the second index at the three positions ([0175] teaches acquiring a second index based on the ratio of sensor outputs to evaluate the centroid, as shown by the mathematical expressions. [0213] teaches that from the acquired measured result of the EUV light sensor 43, the controller 8 specifies the evaluated value of the centroid of the EUV light 277 for each of the reference scan points), and controls the actuator to move the irradiation position of the laser light ([0245] teaches that the controller controls the application position adjusting unit 7 according to the set targeted application position).
Nishimura in view of Kouge does not specifically teach controlling the actuator to move the irradiation position of the laser light in a direction for causing the value of the second index not to exceed the vibration threshold when at least one of the acquired values of the second index has exceeded the vibration threshold.
Chen teaches adjusting a configurable parameter of the laser module when an energy ratio falls outside an acceptable range ([0089] teaches determining whether the first energy ratio is within a first acceptable range. In response to the first energy ratio is out of the first acceptable range, adjusting a configurable parameter of the excitation laser module to set the first energy ratio within the first acceptable range). The adjustment occurs to keep variations in check (Chen [0075] teaches that the controller 90 continuously adjusts the configurable parameters of the excitation laser module 300 and will not stop the adjustment until the controller 90 detects the variation of energy measurement of the EUV light is in the acceptable range). Chen further teaches that part of the adjustment is done through adjusting actuator 332 to control a movement of the steerable mirror, thereby changing the amount of the excitation laser reflected and/or scattered by the target droplet into the energy sensor module ([0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nishimura in view of Kouge to incorporate monitoring the energy ratio of the EUV sensors and trigger the adjustment mechanism when the ratio exceeds an acceptable range/threshold, as taught Chen. One of ordinary skills in the art would be motivated to make such modification to maintain a consistent and stable light energy (Chen [0075]) and prevent misaligned pulse that causes reduction in the amount of plasma (Chen [0041]). Note: the vibration threshold would have been obvious as discussed above in claim 1.
20. Regarding claim 12:
The modified invention above teaches the EUV light generation system according to claim 1. Nishimura further teaches an EUV light concentrating mirror configured to reflect and concentrate the EUV light ([0106] teaches the EUV light focusing mirror 231 reflects and focuses EUV light 277).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY LI whose telephone number is (571) 272-5043. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-4:30pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Kim can be reached at (571)272-2293. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LARRY LI/
Examiner, Art Unit 2881
/MICHAEL J LOGIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights